Crime Weekly - S3 Ep228: Dr. Thomas Kolman: Our Dentist Is a Con Man (Part 2)

Episode Date: July 26, 2024

On the morning of November 29, 2011, 44-year-old Dr. Thomas Kolman didn’t make it to work at his regular time, so his wife, Linda, went looking for him. She eventually found him reclined in his car, unresponsive, in the parking lot of Planet Fitness in Ulster, New York. After Tom was pronounced dead, an investigation into his death began and detectives soon uncovered an illicit affair and received a toxicology report that hinted at foul play. And as the case continued to unfold, the shocking reality of what happened to Dr. Thomas Kolman began to emerge. Try our coffee!! - www.CriminalCoffeeCo.com Become a Patreon member -- > https://www.patreon.com/CrimeWeekly Shop for your Crime Weekly gear here --> https://crimeweeklypodcast.com/shop Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CrimeWeeklyPodcast Website: CrimeWeeklyPodcast.com Instagram: @CrimeWeeklyPod Twitter: @CrimeWeeklyPod Facebook: @CrimeWeeklyPod ADS: 1. SKIMS.com - Shop the Lounge Collection today! Select our podcast after you order so they know we sent you! 2. RocketMoney.com/CrimeWeekly - Cancel your unwanted subscriptions and more! 3. SimpliSafe.com/CrimeWeekly - Get 20% off ANY new SimpliSafe system when you sign up for Fast Protect Monitoring! 4. EatIQBAR.com - Text WEEKLY to 64000 to get 20% off ALL IQBAR products and FREE shipping!

Dear McDonald's, your breakfast menu, fire. Tens across the board. I could be happy with anything, even though I order the same thing every time. Thanks for not judging me. I'll try something new next time. Maybe. Score a two for $5 deal on a sausage McMuffin with egg and more. Limited time only.

Price and participation may vary. Cannot be combined with any other offer. Single item at regular price. Tired of trying diet after diet without results? Mochi Health offers a long-term weight loss solution personalized to your needs. Our board-certified obesity doctors and registered dietitians provide expert guidance to help you succeed. Eligible patients can access

custom formulated GLP-1 medication at an affordable set price delivered monthly. Take our free quiz at joinmochi.com and use code audio 40 for $40 off your first month. That's joinmochi.com. Hello, everybody. Welcome back to Crime Weekly. I'm Stephanie Harlow. And I'm Derek Levasseur. Thomas Coleman case. And as a quick refresher, on the morning of November 29th, 2011, 44-year-old Dr. Thomas Coleman was found dead in his car in the parking lot of a Planet Fitness in Ulster, New York. Now, initially, his cause of death was unclear, but things seemed suspicious, so the police opened an investigation. They soon discovered that a light-colored SUV had been captured on surveillance next to Tom's car in

the parking lot. And this car just so happened to look like Tom's best friend, Dr. Gil Nunez's SUV. Detectives also found out that Gil and Tom's wife, Linda, were having an affair. As detectives continued digging deeper into Tom's death, it was revealed that Tom had died from midazolam poisoning, prompting detectives to officially investigate his death as a murder. So that's the basic gist. I mean, listen, if we really wanted to give a basic gist, we would talk about the fact that, yes, Linda and Gil were having an affair, but then Tom found out about the affair through various methods and Gil admitted to the affair.

And then Tom allegedly allowed it to continue and they all just stayed friends and hung out together. And there was no issues with that, even up to the night before his death. Tom and Gil were watching a sports game together in different houses, but texting each other throughout the whole game and talking to each other, you know, as friends and telling each other they love each other and this, this and that. So very weird dynamic. And hopefully we learn a little bit more about that today. Yeah, I don't remember if I said this last week or not. So I'll just I'll say it again here.

There is a part of me that wonders what Tom really thought of this whole situation because he's no longer with us. So he can't dispute anything that's being said after the fact. What I mean by that is from what we're hearing from Linda, he was on board with this. He knew about it. He was okay with it, but there's also a reality where he wasn't on board with it and he thought it was over with, which is why he was still friends with Gil and moving on with life as if, you know, this was a mistake. It was a one-time thing and, and then it was whatever. So I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it's tough to take everything at face value when the person at the center of all this, the victim,

is no longer here to tell their side of the story. But this whole dynamic is just fascinating to me and I'm still on the fence as far as if it is Gil in that truck, is it someone else that we're unaware of yet? Did Gil hire someone? Did Linda hire someone? I don't believe it was Linda just based on timing of her being at the home. So I think she's out of the equation. It doesn't necessarily completely rule her out from being somehow responsible. Maybe she hired someone, but it still brings up the question as to why Tom would go to the back of the parking lot and meet with this individual willingly, because I believe Thomas was there first. Yes.

And then this car showed in. So whatever transpired, Thomas was aware that this meeting was going to happen beforehand. I don't think he would park in the back of the parking lot. And then wait. And then just wait. And just unexpectedly, someone else shows up. and they were there for a little bit. So I don't know. I don't know how it's going to play out. I did not look ahead and I hope that many of you didn't as well, although I saw some comments where people were like, I'm sorry, I had to look it up. So I

don't know how this one plays out. I'm ready to dive into it. I want to learn how this all is connected. And from what you said last week, we don't even have complete resolution in this case. So who knows if we'll even get that opportunity to know what happened. Well, as you can imagine, detectives immediately started investigating Linda and Gil for Tom's murder. Yeah, they were the two people closest to Tom. Phil walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. Yeah, they were the two people closest to Tom. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. Yeah, they were his wife and his best friend, and they also happened to be having an affair. And on top of that, right, we already talked about this, Gil drove a light-colored SUV, just like the one seen in the parking lot, even though the surveillance footage was grainy

and you couldn't tell exactly what kind of SUV it was. And both Gil and Linda worked in the health field, so they potentially both had access to midazolam. So Gil was brought in for questioning, but for some reason he wasn't read his Miranda rights. Detectives told him that they knew he had met Tom at Planet Fitness before his death. They claimed they had video surveillance proving it.

And Gil repeatedly said, basically, I don't know what you're talking about. I wasn't there that morning. But the detectives pushed on and accused Gil of feeding Tom something that killed him. They suggested he wanted to take Tom out of the picture so he could have Linda for the rest of his life. But Gil remained adamant that he didn't have anything to do with Tom's death. And this wasn't a crazy theory on behalf of the police, because if you remember right from last episode, Gail had actually proposed to Linda, like asked her to marry him and run away with him, even though she was already married to Tom. So around two hours into the interrogation, questioning became extremely accusatory in nature, and detectives refused to allow Gil, who had not yet been charged with anything, to leave when he said he had to return to work.

And although he was now being treated like a suspect, Gil was still not read his Miranda rights. The interview continued for hours, and sometimes the detectives became aggressive, cursing and slamming their fists on the table. They also continued lying to Gil about what evidence they had against him, which is legal. They can do that. We've already discussed that before. But the fact that it's going on for hours and they're like, we have your car there, we see you on surveillance. And he's like, I wasn't there. It kind of says something because if he was there and the police are looking at him and they're like, we have you on surveillance, he he probably would have admitted to it already and been like, oh, yeah, actually, I did meet him there. But, you know, we just had a quick chat and then I had to get to work and I was going to go work out. But I decided to go to work early instead.

Something. But instead, he just continues. Yeah. He continues denying that he was there, even though they're telling him they have this hard evidence. They see him there. You would think they would admit to it. I've had situations where I will actually show them a photo of them at the scene and they'll say, nope, not me. And it's like, no, no, that's that's you. I could see there's a name tag on your shirt and it says, hi, I'm Derek.

But they're like, nope, not me. Deep fake. Not me. So I agree with you to the most. The bigger question I have is why not read them the Miranda rights? There's times where I've arrested somebody for larceny of pair of sneakers and I still read them their Miranda rights, not because I plan on questioning them, which a lot of people have that misinterpretation of it, where unless the unless law enforcement is going to question them, they should read their Miranda rights. I always got into the practice of reading Miranda rights, even if I wasn't planning on asking them any direct questions, because there is an opportunity while as a patrolman, I'm driving them in the police cruiser back to the station and they may initiate the conversation by saying, man, you know,

I only did this because I needed this, or I did it because so-and-so told me this. Now they're initiating the conversation and what they're saying could be used against them later. So just out of an abundance of caution, I would usually read the Miranda rights just so I could document legally and truthfully that, hey, they knew their rights. They knew they had the right to remain silent. They knew they had the right to have an attorney present. And yet they engaged with me and said things that were incriminating to what had occurred. So just a really huge lapse in judgment here. The detectives knew they were going to question him. They had a plan of attack, obviously, and they were clearly interrogating him as a suspect.

So I don't know how that happens. I don't even, I don't have an excuse for it. I don't know how you bring someone in to interrogate them for a murder and you forget to do the number one thing, which is read them their rights. I don't get it. I feel like sometimes people are under the impression that your Miranda rights only get read to you

if you're getting arrested. And that's not true. That is true. A lot of people do you if you're getting arrested. And that's not true. That is true. A lot of people do think that. You are right. You are right. But that's not true. You should be read your Miranda rights if you're being questioned by police in any way, shape, or form.

And if you don't, then basically he could have confessed to the entire thing. And it can't be used. They couldn't have used it against him in a court of law. Yeah, I think that comes from TV and movies where they always see the handcuffs getting put on. And as they're doing it, you have the right to remain silent. Yeah, I just saw Detective Stabler from Law and Order doing that as you spoke. So yes, I do think that is where the misconception probably comes from. Yeah, just to be safe, investigators out there should always read whoever they're interviewing them, Miranda writes, because the conversation could be something that doesn't seem important at the time.

And then they say something that makes it extremely relevant to the case. And now you're in you're in this weird spot where if later defense gets a hold of it, they could say, well, did you read them their Miranda rights before it went there? Oh, you didn't. OK, well, we would like all of that thrown out. And nine times out of 10, it will get thrown out. Especially if you're questioning somebody for hours, there's a good chance they could say something that you might want to bring up in a trial later. And now you can't. So, yeah, just do it to be safe. You know, it should be like on the checklist, like these cops need a little post-it note in the interrogation room. And it says like-do list, one, read Miranda Rights. Check that off and then you could do whatever you want. The only last thing I want to say about Miranda Rights, just because for anybody out there,

if an officer approaches you and says, hey, what are you doing over here? They technically don't have to read your Miranda Rights then. You should look at it as, and there's a lot of videos out there about this, but just think of the word custody, right? If you feel like you're in custody where you don't have the freedom to leave and an officer is questioning you, that's the point where they should be reading you your Miranda rights. But if an officer comes up to you and just starts asking you about why you're over there, they don't technically have to read you your rights at that point. So just to make that distinction, I don't want people out there, if an officer comes up to them and says, hey, did you see something going on over here? And you stop and say, wait,

where's my Miranda rights? It's more so, and you can always ask this. We see people do this all the time. Am I free to leave? Am I? Yeah. Am I free to leave? If they say no, and they're continuing the questioning, and then at that point, they should be reading you your rights, even if you're not under arrest at that point. Just so you guys are clear on it as far as I don't want anyone out there. Always consult with your local attorney, but it doesn't always have to require handcuffs. So like this is a perfect example. Gil was not under arrest at this point. He was just he was being interrogated as a suspect. But based on what you just described to us being held there for two hours, him saying on what you just described to us, being held there

for two hours, him saying multiple times that I have to go and then not letting him leave, that is in custody. He did not have the freedom to leave. Therefore, his Miranda rights should have been read to him and they weren't. And that's probably what happened here where they brought him in initially. They thought they were just going to be nice about it and just try to talk to him. But as soon as the questions became potentially incriminating in nature, his rights should have been read to him. And as a safety, they should have read him off the rip anyways, because they already felt he was a suspect. So cuffs, no cuffs. If you don't have the freedom to leave and they're questioning you about a case, Miranda rights.

Don't answer anything unless they do. Well, throughout the whole interrogation, Gil stayed calm and he adamantly denied having anything to do with Tom's death. Finally, after eight hours, it wasn't two hours, it was eight hours, Gil had enough. He asked for an attorney and he was let go. When Gil got home, he found out that his home and dental office had both been searched and his computer files had been taken. That's when he realized that detectives really thought he'd done something to Tom, so he hired an attorney. I think it's pretty clear when you're sitting there for eight hours and they're like, we've got you dead to rights, that they think you did something to Tom. Yeah.

But, yeah. So obviously they were able to get a warrant to search his home and his office and to remove some of his electronics and files and things. So the police must have had some evidence that was enough for a judge to grant that warrant. You just need enough to articulate that you believe this individual could be connected to the crime. You want to have some level of probable cause. And

then again, it's a search to find the evidence that may lead to an arrest. So it's not the whole case. You don't need to have enough to have them convicted of the crime, but enough where a judge says, yeah, based on the circumstances and the facts of this case, specifically that Pathfinder was probably a huge element in this, the judge will issue the search warrant. Yes, but get this. During the search of Gill's office, investigators found two emergency medical kits, and inside each one was a vial of midazolam. This may seem really suspicious on the surface, but midazolam was actually included in the emergency medical kits when they were mailed to Gill's office from the company that provides the kits. Each year between 2007 and 2010, Gil was sent refills for

each of the drugs in the kit, including midazolam. But then in August 2011, just a few months before Tom was found dead, the company decided to stop including some of the drugs in their kits. And one of those drugs was midazolam that they weren't going to include in the kit anymore. So they sent Gil a new emergency kit along with instructions on how to dispose of the drugs that were no longer going into the kits. Because investigators had found midazolam in Gil's old kits, that meant he hadn't followed directions

to get rid of the old drugs no longer included in the kits. Again, this may seem suspicious, but it's important to know that the vials were full and unopened and they didn't have Gil's fingerprints on them. Still not a good coincidence for Gil, regardless. I agree with everything you said there, but it doesn't look good optically to think that he had that type of medication at his disposal. Is there another vial that was not found at the property that had already been used? Doesn't mean nothing that those vials that were there were unopened. He could have already taken another vial, used it and disposed of it. Especially because between 2007 and 2010, he was sent refills for each of the drugs in the kits.

Exactly. And the one that they found in his old kits were the old ones. So where did the new refills go? Exactly right. So it's one of those situations where, yeah, they found some vials there. But just the fact that we have this particular drug that's found in our victim system and one of the suspects on our list has access to that drug in their home, not a good look. And the fact that there's vials there that are unopened doesn't really change the perspective of the optics behind that. Well, let's take our first break and we'll be right back. Bettering your business takes working with the best. With the James Hardy Alliance,

you gain access to leads, training, networking, and support from the number one brand of siding in North America. Achieve new levels of success by joining the James Hardy Alliance today. So detectives continued on with their investigation and they had Gil's computer searched. And investigators discovered that Gil had done one search for midazolam. However, court records don't make it clear when the search was made, so I couldn't figure out if it was before or after Tom's death. What I do know is that during the computer search, investigators also found a fake CIA identification and a forged Washington Post press pass. So we're going to get more into the CIA stuff later on in this episode,

but right now all you need to know is that Gil said he bought the fake CIA identification a year before he met Tom and Linda because he wanted to spice up his sex life with his wife at the time. Gil said he had come up with a CIA character he'd used during sex. It was Special Agent Dr. G, a dental James Bond licensed to implant tracking devices for the CIA. Listen, listen, this is crazy. I wonder if anybody like talked to his wife and was like, hey, did you guys play bedroom games where Gil pretended to be a CIA agent and wore nothing but this fake CIA badge? People really got a kick out of our CIA conversation last week. Yeah, I do wonder if he had like the holster, like he must have had some gadgets, something where he ordered on Amazon or something like that, where he was.

Maybe if that's a true story. I don't know. I don't know. The whole CIA thing was hilarious to me, but. Because it's like, we know you didn't just like go with the cia thing to play sex games with your wife you told linda that you were in the cia and that you were having like your cia friend um figure out who this like samantha blackmailer person was he definitely didn't just use the cia as like a sexy thing to spice up the bedroom. It was like a thing he told people that he was trying to manipulate and lie to and gaslight. So we know that. Yeah. And listen, I don't know. I don't even know. I mean, there's no way to justify it. It's weird. I know people have their own things that they do behind closed doors. And if it's done in the right

way, you do you. Yeah. But once it leaves the bedroom. As long as it's consensual, man. Yeah, consensual. Once it leaves the bedroom, as you're saying, I don't think this is the CIA line. The first time he ever used it was with Linda. It's probably been something he's used for a while.

And it's wrong. It's wrong. It's actually a federal offense. But that's a different story for a different day. He'd have to be using it in an official capacity, but putting yourself or portraying yourself as a federal officer, you can be arrested for that. Now, not as far as trying to pick someone up, but if you're trying to portray yourself in an official capacity as a federal officer, or even just a police officer for that matter, obviously that's an arrestable offense. Well, I think that sending people like blackmail letters

and like threatening letters and then pretend, and then pretending you're in the CIA and promising the person getting those letters that you're going to figure out who it is. That's some kind of crime. That's some kind of weird crime. I would I would it be a tough one. But yeah, I would agree because now you're you're kind of working in some some form of an official capacity and harassment and stuff. So if you're using that in some type of abusive way that could eventually affect other people. Yeah, I could see I could see a problem with that. I could see them coming after you. I don't know if they would, but if they wanted to, they could take a shot. I don't know if it would stick. Absolutely. It should stick because that's crazy. I mean,

even if you just met somebody in a bar, you met a guy in the bar and he's like, oh, I'm a CIA agent. You can't tell anybody. And then you start like dating him based on, you know, partly that belief that that should be illegal in some way. It should be illegal. So while the CIA identification was kind of sketchy, it still wasn't proof that Gil was the one who had killed Tom. So the investigation continued, and this time detectives were looking into Linda, Tom's wife. They searched the hospital where she worked as an administrative assistant, but there was no missing midazolam. For some unknown reason, detectives never searched the Coleman home, so it's unclear if they would have found any

midazolam there. The cops are dropping the ball left and right with this case right now. Why would you not search the home? If you thought she could possibly be involved, why would you only search the hospital facility she worked at and not the home that she lived in with Tom? Because even if you found Medazlam, you could have figured out like, oh, was this Linda's or maybe this was Tom's? Yeah. The only thing I could think of is maybe they tried to and they just couldn't get a certain – maybe the judge wouldn't sign off on it because they didn't have enough probable cause. I don't know that to be true. I agree with everything you're saying as far as why wouldn't you search the home where the victim lived?

Even if it's a consent to search, they could have went to Linda and said, hey, listen, do you mind if we search the property? We just need a consent to search from you. Nothing going on here. We just want to make sure everything's on the up and up. And she probably would have signed off on it. I agree. Even the excuse of like, oh, they couldn't get a warrant signed by a judge. They wouldn't have necessarily needed that. They probably could have went right to Linda and said, hey, just out of, you know, out of precaution, we're going to search the home if we have your consent, have her was Gil. And when they turned to Linda,

it was more as a, you know, let's kill some time until we find out more information about Gil. And also maybe Linda can provide more information about Gil, but they thought it was Gil. No doubt. And we, and I talk about this on Detective Perspective all the time. A lot of the cold cases we do in some situations, they're not solvable for one reason or another, but in many instances, it's because of what you just said. They have tunnel vision. They go in there and they get, you know, three or four breadcrumbs that points to one person and they put the blinders on and then the real suspect walks right by them. And it's detectives are human beings. And when they start to have this hunch that they have the right

guy, they just need to get the facts to support it. They can miss obvious evidence or they can make mistakes in the investigatory process where they're not searching areas that you would think on the surface are commonsensical, but they're missing those steps because they feel, hey, if Gil's the guy, Linda's home isn't important. And that's how you make mistakes. And that's how you end up with podcasters talking about it later. And it sounds to everyone like it's just this obvious thing they should be doing. And yet they didn't do it. I mean, even if they didn't find the actual drug there, now, if they go to trial, Gil's attorneys can use this as a way that detectives missed potential evidence. They can

say, well, how would you know Linda didn't have this midazolam? You never checked her house. And it just casts more reasonable doubt about the guilt of their client. Absolutely. Yeah. No, I'm with you. I'm with you. I can't. I can't. I don't have an explanation for it. So Linda was also brought in for questioning. She took a polygraph. She passed. And eventually she was officially ruled out as having any involvement in her husband Tom's death. Gil, on the other hand, was not ruled out. Detectives felt there were too many suspicious things going on with him. He was having an affair with Tom's wife. His car looked like the one seen in the surveillance videos. He had access to midazolam. He did a search on the computer for midazolam.

It was all adding up and detectives couldn't ignore it. Also had a motive, right? Also had a motive. Oh, yeah, that's the affair, yeah. Yeah, I mean, he also, so you have means motive opportunity with him. So it's one of those situations where I don't blame them for feeling this way. But you have to have the evidence to support it. And these factors,

a lot of it's speculative. The vehicle, they don't know concretely that that's the same vehicle. It could be, or it could be a coincidence. The midazolam, yes. The surveillance video, to a certain degree, but as I just mentioned, not 100%. And so you really, when you break it down individually, you don't have a lot against Gill. Even though on the surface it looks like him, you don't have enough to make an arrest. No. Because if you did, you would have. Yep, exactly. They did not have enough to make an arrest. So hoping to find more evidence, detectives decided to try and figure out what Gil and Tom had been talking about the day before Tom was found dead. Because if you recall from part one, Gil told detectives that he and Tom spent the evening at their own homes,

watching the Giants game, and then texting about the game throughout it. And investigators searched Tom's phone records and found that on the evening before Tom was found dead, he had been texting with Gil back and forth. In fact, a total of 62 texts had been sent. However, when investigators went to search Tom's phone, they discovered that all 62 of 62 texts had been sent. However, when investigators went to search Tom's phone, they discovered that all 62 of those texts had been deleted, along with all other texts from the two days before Tom was found dead. Later, investigators were able to recover 20 of the texts from Gil on the day before Tom was found dead,

and they were all about the Giants football game they'd been watching. But what happened to all of those other 40 something texts? What was in them and what was in the texts from the previous days that were erased off the phone? And also who erased them off of the phone? That was something from part one. I had a note here and you were in the middle of a sentence, so I didn't get back around to it. But when you originally talked about the deleted text messages, I didn't know if they were deleted from Gil's phone or Tom's phone. But now you're saying Tom's phone, which raises a huge red flag because it could be the perpetrator, right? They were in the vehicle with Tom before killing him or after killing him, and they opened his phone and deleted those text messages, or there's another player in this game that we're unaware of, or we shouldn't be ruling Linda out at this point. There's a lot of variables that come back into

play knowing that the text messages were deleted from Tom's phone because there's only a few people who would have had access to it. Or it could be a completely random person like Samantha. Exactly. It could be as well. Like Samantha could be real. Gil could have conspirators that we don't know about. We just we don't know yet. And that's why maybe he was so sure and able to tell the police so confidently that he wasn't there that morning because technically he wasn't. So detectives continued investigating and interviewing

witnesses, and one of the more important interviews came from a woman named Mariel, who rented an apartment from Gil above the dental practice. She told detectives that she lived there with her husband and that Gil occasionally had dinner with the couple. One of those dinners took place right before Tom was found dead, and during that dinner, Gil talked about how he had spent Thanksgiving with his girlfriend and her husband, a.k.a. Linda and Tom. other women. And herein lies the crux of the issue and what I've kind of been suspecting, whereas Gil never really wanted this to be like a love triangle thing. Gil never really wanted it to be him, Tom, and Linda. Gil always wanted it to be Gil and Linda. And he sort of played along like, oh, yeah, we're all friends. I love you, Tom. I love you as much as I love her. We all love each other. But as he's going through this process of ingraining himself into these people's marriage, he's also trying to get Tom to step out and see what else is out there,

hoping that Tom will eventually just be like, well, Linda and Gil are together. Why don't I get myself a girlfriend, too? And then organically, things would just move on. And Gil and Linda would move on together. And then Tom and this new woman would move on together. That's what he was hoping. And that's why Gil played nice, in my opinion. No, I think you're right. And I think Linda, on the other hand, was looking at Gil as something different.

Something fun. Something fun. Something short term. But at the end of the day, was still in love with Tom and still wanted to be with Tom. And I think that maybe that message was not picked up on by Gil, which is why he's building her custom closets. So that's that's the issue that you run into here where the the messages are being not received in the way that they're meant to be delivered. So you end up with a situation like this, where you got three different people thinking three different things. Yes, exactly, exactly. So we're gonna take a quick break and we'll be right back.

Bettering your business takes working with the best. With the James Hardy Alliance, you gain access to leads, training, networking, and support from the number one brand of siding in North America. Achieve new levels of success by joining the James Hardy Alliance today. All right, so the information coupled

with everything else detectives had uncovered led them to come up with the idea that Gil decided to kill Tom in order to get Linda to stay with him. Their theory was that on the day before the murder, so November 28th, Gil texted Tom and said they should meet at the gym in the morning. On the morning of the 29th, they met in the parking lot as planned, and Gil arrived first, driving his white SUV,

and when Tom arrived, he parked next to Gil. Once they were together, Gil got into Tom's car and somehow gave Tom midazolam, which he'd gotten at his dentist office. While waiting for Tom to pass out from the drug, Gil put on rubber gloves, entered Tom's car, removed all of his DNA from the vehicle, and deleted the text from Tom's phone. That way, no one would know that he'd lured Tom to that Planet Fitness. Then Gil waited for the midazolam to react with Tom's sleep apnea. And once Tom was dead, Gil left and went about his day. That's like a very succinct explanation,

but a lot of things have to go right. Like how would Gil know he was getting rid of all of his DNA kind of thing? He's a dentist. He's not actually in the CIA. There's no way. What do you think about that theory though on its head though? Yes. The general gist of the theory works and it makes sense with what we've already sort of seen, right? Tom's there and then this other SUV is there. They're parked at the back of the parking

lot as if going to the gym wasn't the reason for being in the parking lot, as if they were kind of looking maybe for a private, isolated and secluded spot to have a conversation. We can't really see what's happening in the video. As it said, it's very grainy and blurry. So you don't know if anybody got in or out of the car. But I don't know. What do you make of it? I mean, I'm speculating on my notepad. I look like I'm a crazy person with all the different things I'm writing down, but yeah, I guess it kind of

plays out, but I'm in the same mindset of you. A lot of things have to happen here. As we were just talking about, there's no way to ensure, I don't care who you are, there's no way to ensure that all your DNA is removed. It could be a hair fiber that gets left on the back of the seat. He would have to have vacuums. Yes, a hazmat suit, more than just rubber gloves. And then the administering of the midazolam. I would think that if he took out a syringe or something like that, there would be a- It sounds like they think that Gail gave Tom a drink of some kind.

But once again, we need to know, was anything found in Tom's stomach? Like, was there coffee in Tom's stomach that hadn't been digested fully? But they got rid of those contents, right? Well, yes. And then also, was there a drink container in the car? Was there a bottle of Snapple or a cup of coffee or something like that? We don't really know these things. So what was the

administration route? And to me, it's still from the top of this, meeting up with someone this early in the morning, we're talking 4.35 o'clock in the morning, having someone meet you there. To me, it seems like this meeting has happened before. Where Tom parked, I would guess that Tom had done this on numerous occasions. Was he meeting another woman? Was he meeting Gil? Was there something going on between him and Gil? No, I think he was going to the gym and Gil probably the night before was like, hey, can we get together and talk about this tomorrow? And Tom was like, I'm working. Yeah, I'm working. I'm busy. I have to work all day. Honestly, I don't even feel like talking to you about this, But you know what? I do go to the gym early. So if you want to stop by before I get my workout in, we're halfway through this episode. I'm leaning

towards he is in some capacity. Why would these text messages be deleted only from Gil? That doesn't make any sense. And then you have all these other circumstantial pieces of evidence that don't look good, plus a motive. And it does lean towards Gil. But at this point, as I've said a couple of times, do you have enough to make an arrest? No. So this theory, in theory, is good, but doesn't really mean much at the end of the day. You can't you can't arrest them for it. And like, did the police ask Gil, OK, these texts from you are erased from Tom's phone. Do you still have them on your phone?

Because if I were if I were to find out that the texts were also erased on Gil's phone, that's extra suspicious, right? Because now that person, whoever deleted them would have to have access to both phones. And we talk about the pool of people who would have had access to Tom's phone. Now we have to cut it in half because how many of those people would also have access to Gil's phone who's still currently alive and in possession of his phone? Unless Gil and Linda were working together and Gil was like, I'll erase my text messages. When Tom goes to sleep, you erase his. So Gil doesn't even have to get out of the car and erase any text messages when he sees Tom in the parking lot.

Yeah, it's a collaborative effort, conspiracy. They're working together. That's also very possible. issues with why this whole theory of how Gil got in the car and poisoned Tom and then erased the text messages, it doesn't seem super plausible. But even though it seems like a solid theory on the surface, there were at least two major problems additionally. And one was that investigators had found Tom, Linda, and their son's DNA in the car, but not Gil's. So how was Gil able to selectively erase his DNA, but then leave everyone else's DNA behind? The second problem was that the detectives didn't know how Gil was able to give Tom the midazolam. The autopsy and the toxicology reports weren't able to tell them that. So at this point, detectives did not have enough evidence to charge Gil with murder. Their investigation continued. They did go to Linda with their suspicions about Gil, but she refused to believe them.

While she was no longer seeing Gil romantically, she said she had a really hard time believing that he could or would ever do anything to hurt Tom. Now, November 29th, 2012 brought the one-year anniversary of Tom's death. Everyone had really been struggling with the loss of Tom, but according to Tom's ex-wife, his first wife, Tom's oldest son, Bradley, had been taking it the hardest. A few weeks after the first anniversary, Bradley sadly attempted suicide, and after recovering from that attempt, he told his mother, quote, I just wanted to go to sleep and wake up with dad, end quote, which is so, so sad because it shows you how good of a father Tom was. Even with his children from his first marriage, when he's not actively living in the home,

he still was able to create such a strong bond with his son Bradley. Tragically, three months later, Bradley attempted suicide again, and this time he was successful. It's so, so sad. He was only 18 years old. So once again, this is illustrative of the ripple effect that these crimes have on the families, friends, and communities around the victims. It's not just the victim. It has a horrible butterfly effect on everybody that was close to the victim. And now we have a kid with his whole life ahead of him who lost his in these cases that we're discussing where there's a lack of resolution, it can almost be worse because not only did they lose their loved one, but the person responsible for it is still out there. And you think about the anxiety associated with that. Could they do it to someone else? Could they do it to them? And then just also just not having them be held accountable for what they did, that can weigh on a person as well. So yeah, when these things occur, I see it all the time with family members. We have to stay in touch with them as much as we can. I talk about Julie Norris all the time with Michelle Norris.

It's been over 30 years. That woman doesn't go a day without thinking about her daughter. And a lot of times, every anniversary, we text each other and we talk to each other because for her, it's just my reality when I'm covering the case. It's her reality every day. She still doesn't know what happened to her daughter. So it's unfortunate. And to think that another person was affected by this. Now this the perpetrator has now in a way taken two lives.

And not only now do the loved ones, the family members and friends of Tom Coleman have to mourn his loss, have to cope with that. But now this additional loss of of of his son, an 18 year old who who took his own life, you know, and a tragedy upon tragedy. And it's like the hits don't stop coming. Absolutely. Yeah, no, it's terrible. So while Tom's family was now mourning another loss, Gil was moving on with his life.

He continued working at his practice, and he also started online dating. He ended up meeting a new woman, and they got married in the fall of 2014. And obviously this woman, she believed that Gail had nothing to do with Tom's death. I would hope so if you married him. But we see this often, the new partner is kind of, you know, believes their partner feels bad,

believes the partner's being, you know, wrongly persecuted, this, this, and that. And they're loyal. They're ride or die, which you should be with your partner. You should be able to trust and believe them. Yeah, but what's interesting to me is what you're saying here. Gil and Linda are not together. That's interesting.

So after all this happens, there's this thruple thing going on. But after Tom's taken out of the equation, whether that was Gil's motive or not, for some reason, Gil and Linda are no longer a thing. Now, why is that? Why do you think that is? You tell me. What's your theory? Well, Linda might think that Gil's involved. If Linda's not involved, then Linda clearly thinks Gil has something to to do with it and as we talked about

numerous times that the the the feelings on this relationship were not reciprocated they weren't the same gil was obviously much more into linda than she was into him and maybe once this went down they linda probably told him hey it's not happening anymore we're done or maybe gil felt like continuing something with Linda would only make him look suspicious. Exactly. Yeah. If I had to guess theory, Linda cut it off. I agree, actually. Unless you tell me by the end of this episode of the next one, she was involved. And then I'm just completely wrong. So meanwhile, detectives continued building their case against Gil. And while doing so, they uncovered many small crimes that Gill had been committing.

He was eventually charged for some of the crimes, but not all. One crime they found was that Gill lied on multiple marriage licenses. In 1987, Gill married a woman in Queens, New York, and that marriage ended in divorce. And then in August of 2001, Gill got married again, this time to a woman who we're going to call Annie. But on his marriage license to Annie, Gil said he'd never been married before, which is obviously a lie because he'd been married back in 1987. Detectives further learned that Gil had been inappropriate with Annie's sister. Reportedly, a year after marrying Annie, Gil approached Annie's sister multiple times telling

her he loved her wanted to be with her and that he had married the wrong sister what a scumbag Gil and Annie's marriage later came to an end surprise surprise around the time Gil met Linda and Tom so Gil's monkey branching from person to person and this feels a lot like limerence to me. Do you know what limerence is? Nope. It's basically an intense longing for a romantic connection that can lead to a serious addiction. Basically, you're addicted to love. And this can be completely unrequited, by the way. You can see like a coworker and start building this idea of who they are and who they are to you. And you admire them for all these qualities. And you start to

create this relationship that you have with them in your head that is not actually a real relationship. And it can go on for years. And it ruins lives because it's been described as the state of overwhelming and unexpected longing for emotional reciprocation from another human being who is known as the limerent object. And this other human being is often perceived as perfect for you. If you were able to be with them, they would solve all of your problems and you would be happy and everything would be great. But they are always unavailable to you. The question is, would Gil go as far as killing the person he's in love with or believes he's in love with in order – would he go as far as killing their significant other in order to be with them? That's – how far – how deep does this go?

So after this marriage with Annie goes down the drain in the fall of 2014, Gil married his third wife. And on that marriage license, Gil said he'd only been married once before, which, once again, of course, we know it's a lie. Gil was never charged with anything related to the marriage licenses, but the investigation into his illegal activities continued. And detectives learned that Gil was posing as multiple other people. One person Gil posed as was his own mother in an email to Linda prior to Tom's death. And in this email, Gil's mother pleaded with Linda to leave Tom, saying Linda and Gil would only be happy if they, quote, spent the rest of their lives loving each other, end quote.

Super creepy. Super creepy. I don't know if he's involved with the murders, but regardless, Gil's got some got some major issues. So let's take a break. We'll be right back. We figured out and detectives figured out that Gil's just not a super honest person. He's lying on marriage licenses. He's posing as other people trying to convince Linda that he's the only one for her. And then detectives learned more about how Gil was posing as a CIA agent. As it turns out, Gil had told several people that he was a special agent of the CIA. He even forged top secret stationery on CIA letterhead and had a fake CIA identification. He also told

people at his dental office that when the CIA called him, he would plant CIA trackers in people's teeth. But that's not where Gil's impersonation of a CIA agent ends. If you recall from part one of the series, in early 2011, Linda started receiving texts from a woman who claimed she was having sex with Tom. After receiving these texts, Linda asked Gil, who, remember, she believed he was in the CIA, to help her figure out if the texts were real, and Gil said he would help, and he later provided her with a letter supposedly written by one of his colleagues at the agency. After Tom was found dead, Linda gave the police the letter, which read in part, quote, Sometimes we as human beings believe that we know a person's character and behavior very well

just because we have cohabitated with that person for many years, but we all can make mistakes in life. And as research has proven, people fall out of love all the time and they stay in a relationship Oh, my God. Yo, what is the CIA agent giving relationship advice to Linda for? Yeah, that's the part I was laughing at. I would expect a CIA agent, if they wrote me a letter, it'd be very pragmatic to the point like, hey, this is the answer. Yeah, they're not adding any fluff to it. So the fact that they're also playing a love therapist at the same time is a little,

that right there should be red flag number one. Yes, and going along with Gil's narrative, I mean, at this point, this CIA agent, you know, whether it was a man or a woman, come in and maybe they were having some issues in their relationship. And sometimes as police officers, we get called to a domestic dispute that hasn't raised to the level of a criminal act, but just an argument. And even in those situations, we try to avoid offering any type of relationship advice, even though they're kind of, you know, in a way asking for our opinions on it. And you've seen so many of these instances. You have the data to give an educated response on how things are going to turn out based

on the statistics. Yeah. Could you imagine, not to make a light of the situation, but I got hired when I was 20 and these are situations that I really dealt with. I didn't even know who I was at 20, but at 20, 21 years old, I'm responding to these calls and these adults, you know, are having these arguments and I walk in and the, and the woman is looking at me like, dude, you could be my son. What are you going to do? And I'm like, ma'am, it's going to be okay.

And she's like, oh yeah, what would you do? And I'm like, I don't know. I still live with my mom, but I remember those situations happening and I would leave those calls and I'd be like, man, maybe I'm a little too young for this job. Maybe I'm a little too young. But we got through it. But I mean, it's not your job to give life experience advice anyways. Right. So back to the story, the fact that the CIA agent who's conducting this serious business would decide to also inject some of their personal opinions on who she should be with. I don't know Linda. We haven't talked a ton about Linda and who she is as a person, but I would like to think that upon reading this letter, she would realize that something's up. I would hope so. He's like research and survey shows people fall out of love all the time.

I would hope she would read the rest of this and go, huh. OK, something doesn't smell right. Well, maybe after her husband was was murdered, she started putting things together, putting the pieces together. Yeah. And the police also learned more about Gil posing as Samantha. If you recall from part one over the course of two days in July of 2011, Tom received nearly 1,000 texts from a woman named Samantha. And these texts were all about how Linda was having an affair with Gil. And at first, Gil didn't admit he was the one who sent the texts. Instead, he told Tom he'd help him try and figure out who was sending the texts.

Gil said he knew a CIA computer expert who could trace the origin of the texts, but according to Gil, that connection fell through. So he went to Tom's office and admitted that he was the one that sent the text, but that wasn't the full story. The police found out that Gil had actually offered $500 to his office IT guy, Steve, to pose as the CIA computer expert and meet with Tom and Linda to discuss the texts. And Steve later testified, quote, Dr. Nunez asked me to essentially pose as a CIA agent, end quote. Steve said it was his understanding that Tom and Linda were receiving text messages and that his role was to attend a meeting with the couple and pretend to be a CIA agent to

reassure them that he was investigating the matter. Steve said he did not know the contents of the messages that the Coleman's were receiving. Steve said that Gil showed him a bifold wallet with what appeared to be a CIA badge and identification inside, and Gil asked Steve to take both items, and he also wanted Steve to put his picture on the ID and use that to pass himself off as a CIA agent. Steve said Gill also told him to bring another person to the meeting with the Coleman's, preferably a police officer or retired police officer, because that person would have a badge and a gun.

Steve initially agreed to Gill's request and reached out to a guy named Nicholas, who was a retired Ulster Town police officer, who at that time he was friends with, with Nicholas, Steve and Nicholas were friends. The two met, but Nicholas told Steve, hey, this sounds like a horrible plan. I'm glad someone had common sense. I'm glad. Okay. Finally, we got someone who has a brain. Yeah. Nicholas was like, first of all, this is illegal. First of all, no. This CIA badge looks fake as hell. And I don't want any part of this situation. So Steve canceled the meeting with the Coleman's. I mean, I feel like Steve on his own. I mean, he's a computer tech guy. He's he's smart, right? You got to be. Why would he not

immediately be like, this doesn't sound legal and it doesn't sound like there's good intentions behind this? Why would he even think about going forward with it for 500 bucks? I'm going to give him a pass on this one and I'll tell you why. I agree with everything you said as far as his intelligence, but there's a power dynamic there as well. And I feel like you might have a situation where we're just reading the words on the paper. There could have been something there where he feels like his job is on the line if he doesn't do it. And so you have this doctor who's your boss coming to you. Your spidey senses are going up. You're saying it's wrong. But like we've seen a lot of crimes where the bosses, air quotes, the bosses come to their subordinates and want them to do something that probably isn't in their best interest, even though they're aware of it,

they're concerned about their job security. So I don't know if that's the case. And maybe I'm giving him an excuse that he doesn't deserve, but I could see that being the situation where he just needed confirmation from an outside party to say this is a dumb idea. So we could go back to Nunez and say, hey, we can't do this because a lab coat posing as a doctor tell a subject to shock somebody in another room. Yeah. And, you know, up the shock level and the person obeyed because of the perceived sort of superiority of the doctor telling him to do this. Like, oh, this is a doctor. He's smart. He knows what he's talking about. I don't know what I'm talking about. And Steve may have thought that about Gil, you know, because everybody said Gil was the best guy ever, a great boss, smart, kind. Steve may have been like, Gil's a great guy and he's a doctor and he's my boss.

He's writing my check. Yeah. He has good intentions with this. I've never seen him do anything bad to anybody. So yeah, I guess I could see that. But still, like, once again, I'm so paranoid. I trust no one. I'd be like, I'm all set with this, okay? I'm all set with this, Gil. And for all we know, he knew it was a bad idea,

which is why I went to that third person to kind of cover his ass. Well, no, he went to the third person because Gil was like, go get a cop to add legitimacy to this ruse. And the cop was like, nope. Well, that's what I'm saying. Maybe Steve said, perfect, because now I can have this person be the fall guy.

Yeah, exactly. And say, I would do it for you, Gil, but cop said it's a bad idea. So I think, you know, we're not going to be able to do it. So Steve goes to Gil. He's like, I'm out, dude. Sorry, I can't help you. And then at that point, Gil had no choice but to go to Tom and admit that he was the one posing as Samantha.

He then, remember, got on his knees and begged for forgiveness. But because Gil was caught with a fake CIA ID and letterhead, he would later be charged with possession of a forged instrument. It seems he wasn't charged with the CIA-related crimes immediately because the police believed the CIA impersonation was part of Tom's murder, so they wanted to wait and charge him with all of those crimes together. Yeah. And see, so now he's working. He's portraying himself in an official capacity.

As we were saying earlier, I didn't even know that they eventually charged him with this, but that's what you're looking at. And we can do it even for local law enforcement as well, where if you're using whatever identity you're portraying in some type of capacity that could mislead others, you can be charged with a crime. So the investigation into Gil's crimes continued, and detectives found out that in February of 2014, Gil made a false statement on a pistol license application. Under the application question, have you ever been terminated slash discharged from any employment or the armed forces for cause? Gil answered no, which was a lie because he had been discharged from the Marines for going AWOL in the 80s. As it turns out, Gil enlisted in the Marines in 1987. Then one week into basic training, he went AWOL and he remained AWOL for almost three years until he was arrested.

This dude didn't even get through basic training. OMG. A week? I mean, it's hard. My brother was in the Marines. It's hard. They break you down. But damn. What did you think was going to happen when you enlisted in the Marines, dude? Did you think it was going to be sleepovers and you guys were going to be watching Pretty in Pink and braiding each other's hair? It's not easy. He just wanted the uniform. Ha! He just wanted the uniform.

He wanted the uniform and the ID. He wanted the uniform, the ID, and the welcome to boot camp letter so he could bring it with him and hang it up somewhere. Damn. I don't know how this all relates to. He's like, I'm actually in charge of the entire Marines. Three years, man. I'm the president of the Marines.

So we don't know if Gil's connected to the murder, but I think we can all agree that if he's a con man, dude, he is a con man. Yeah. So he gets arrested for going AWOL. But instead of facing a court martial, Gil was discharged under less than honorable conditions, which it's like, is that a punishment? He ran away. He didn't want to be in the Marines. people he was a Marine, and he also displayed Marine insignia. So for lying on the pistol application, Gil was charged with two counts of perjury, two counts of offering a false instrument for filing, and one count of making an apparently sworn false statement. And he pleaded not guilty to all charges, even though he was guilty of them. I'll tell you what, it's scary to think that this guy was working on people while

they were sleeping. Scary. Dude. What don't we know? What don't we know? Imagine finding out after the fact that you were a patient of this guy. I mean, if he was just cleaning your teeth, no problem, but. Oh, there's a whole blog post written about a previous patient of Gil's. And yeah, I read that last week. So yeah, they're out there. They're out there. Wow. Wow. All right. Let's take our last break and we'll be right back. So detectives continued investigating Gil and found out that he filed a false insurance claim for $8,400 in 2014. The claim stemmed from a fire that occurred at a building he owned next to his dental practice. In 2014, the building caught fire and sustained damage, so Gil filed an insurance claim. There was no suggestion of arson, and the insurance company did not contest the general

claim. However, detectives believed that a small part of the claim, less than 5%, was fraudulent. Gill said this part of the claim was to make up for lost rent, but detectives said he wasn't charging anyone rent at the time, so this was a lie. So for this fraudulent activity, Gill was charged with one count of grand larceny, one count of insurance fraud, and of all, it feels like kind of what we were dealing with in our past case, where the police believe that Gil murdered Tom Coleman. And so they're digging up all of his skeletons and they're trying to get him for whatever they can. Yeah, this is what will happen

when law enforcement has you on their radar. If they can't get you for the crime they're actually after, they will start to monitor your whereabouts, what you're doing, your actions, and to go after other infractions because they're trying to close the walls in on you. And they're building a case against you as they go. But in the meantime, they're getting you for the things they can. Now, I don't know how people feel about that. Hearing it from me to you, whether it's on YouTube or you're on audio, some might not like the way that sounds where, oh, you couldn't get me for the murder. So now you're getting me for these other more not as serious crimes. But I guess to some people, they could be considered serious. What's your opinion on that, Stephanie?

I mean, yeah, I definitely think that's what they're doing. They think he killed Tom. They're, you know, they're looking into all of his background, probably to see, like, were there similar crimes? Like, was he ever in a relationship with another married woman and then her husband accidentally died and it was written off as natural causes? They're probably looking for something like that, but they're going to see what they see while they're looking in the background. And because, you know, most likely

there's a frustration that they can't get him for what they want to get him for. So they're going to just hit him with whatever. And also they're hoping to basically just be up his ass enough where they find something or he slips up or admits to what happened. So I like the way you frame that. And I agree with you. And this is me defending the cops. You know, I know people love that sarcasm if for anybody to pick up on it. But that's how I would look at this, where they're looking at him for a much bigger crime. And as they're pulling back the curtains, as they're opening boxes, they're finding other crimes and therefore they're doing their job and charging him with those crimes. I'm sure some of you, and maybe you're right, will say, oh, this is petty. They're doing this

because they can't get them on what they actually want. So they're targeting him and just hitting him with the minor offenses. That could also be true. That could also be true. And it absolutely has happened. So I'm not sitting here saying that every time these situations unfold like this, it's all on the up and up. But the reality of the situation is if they weren't committing those crimes, they couldn't charge him with them.

And that's where I land. You know, if they're committing the crime, whether they found out initially, as the investigators are concerned, or they're finding out after the fact as they're looking at you for something different, if you did the crime, you got to do the time. So listen, if you don't do it, they can't come after you for it. I will say going after less than 5% of an insurance claim is a little petty. I'm with you. A little petty.

And so that's an even better point. Maybe it's a combination of the two, right? Yeah, it's like you got all this time to do all this shit, but you couldn't read them as Miranda rights? Exactly. Exactly. And there's also an element to address where it's not just one officer working on this. It could be a team of officers. And I can tell you firsthand, we don't all get along with each other. So you may have one set of people working on one element of the case, another working on another, and they're doing different things. Although there's a collaborative effort where everyone's getting together, different investigators are working on different parts of the investigation. And so that's another reason why certain things could be going forward in a certain way and others are not. So a lot of different variables here. I know that not everyone will agree on this one. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.

How do you feel about it? We've talked about this now in two cases. Stephanie just mentioned Marlene Warren. And now obviously we're talking about this case where officers are using other infractions to go after someone for a bigger crime. Do you agree with it? Do you not agree with it? Would love to hear your thoughts. So by the summer of 2015, Gil had only been charged with crimes for the false insurance claim and lying on the pistol application. Detectives were certain that he'd been responsible for Tom's death, however, but they still didn't have enough evidence to back up their theory. For one, they still weren't sure exactly how Gil had given Tom the midazolam. The pathologist hadn't been able to answer that question for them. The pathologist said that midazolam can be given orally and generally is mixed with a liquid. However, he thought itologist said that midazolam can be given orally and generally is

mixed with a liquid. However, he thought it was possible the midazolam had been injected, but once again, he couldn't be sure. To try and figure out if that was possible, Tom's body was actually exhumed twice. During the exhumations, they found traces of midazolam in one of his eyes, in his blood, and his jaw muscles. The amounts weren't high enough to cause the death of a healthy person. However, it could be enough to kill someone with sleep apnea. It still wasn't clear how or when the midazolam got into Tom's system, but knowing that Tom had coffee in his system during the autopsy, the pathologist theorized that the drug could have been hidden in a cup of coffee. Coffee is somewhat bitter, so it would kind of mask the taste of the midazolam, which is also bitter.

No one could be sure the drug had been hidden in coffee, though, since there was no coffee cup left behind in Tom's car. However, the coffee idea was even more believable when lab results from Tom's pants came back and showed that a stain on the pants tested positive for the presence of midazolam. It seemed likely that the midazolam had been accidentally spilled or splashed onto Tom's pants during administration, or Tom was holding the cup of coffee, drinking it, and as he started to lose consciousness, he spilled it or it sloshed out. I don't know. But there was no coffee cup in his car. So we're to think that the perpetrator brings a cup of coffee maybe for both of them. Hey, listen, I grabbed a coffee for you and me before coming over here. I know how you like your coffee. They're sitting there, they're drinking it.

And as they're having a conversation for 20, 30 minutes, then Thomas starts to fall asleep. Is that what we're supposed to believe here? Well, I'd be interested to know how long does midazolam take to work? To take effect? Yes, because if he- Any doctors in the comments, please weigh in

because this is not our area of expertise. And it seems to me like a lot, to be honest. Maybe he had coffee before he left the house. Right. Well, if that's the case, then it's not Gil. If that's the case, it wouldn't be Gil. Correct. So that's a that's another problem.

And I know that, you know, it would take place. It would take effect within just a couple of minutes if it was being injected. But how long would it take if you drank it and then it had to be digested and get into your bloodstream that way? And see, these are the things that we talk about with investigators that can pose problems. Let's say for the sake of this conversation, it takes an hour for midazolam to take effect, right? Well, that fact would rule out Gil or rule out any person administering the coffee in the car, right? So would investigators ignore that because it doesn't support their Gil theory? That's when you can run into problems with these cases where, as you mentioned earlier, confirmation bias could pose some problems in the overall case if you're directly going after one person, but you're pointing your finger up like you figured something out.

So what do you got? Okay. Here's what I found out and bear with me. Okay. So what we do know is that Tom pulls in, this other car pulls in, they're sitting next to each other for a few minutes. The other car pulls out. Tom's car does not move and he does not get out of it. So we're assuming that by the time this other car left, Tom was unconscious because otherwise he would have gotten out of his car.

Gone into the gym. Exactly. Or he would have put his car into drive and left. Now, the clinical sedative effects of midazolam occur within five to 10 minutes of oral midazolam administration. The maximum effect is accomplished in 20 to 30 minutes. So based on that, I believe that he did not. I mean, depending on how far the gym was from his house, I believe he was given it by whoever pulled into that parking lot next to him, because then you could just, you know, wait until he started being

drowsy and like losing consciousness. And then you could leave knowing that it had done its thing and it was going to, you know, do the work. Yeah. Yeah. Five, 10 minutes. Didn't see that coming. Thought it would take longer. Okay. So now Gil's back in play and it also gives him time where he brings them both a coffee. They're talking. They're drinking. I guess you'd have to assume that Thomas is drinking the coffee fast, really fast. So he's drinking the coffee.

He starts to doze out. If it's Gil, he cleans up the car, deletes the text messages, and then gets out of there. Takes the coffee cup. Yeah, it's still a lot to do in a very short period of time. We're really, we're in a small window here. Do you at least agree with that? I mean, this is like- Yes, I do.

Yeah. This is a really, it's a really small window for this all to take place the way- It would have to all go very, very much according to plan. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, we'll roll with it for now. So detectives now built upon their previous theory.

They now believe that when Gil met up with Tom in the parking lot, he gave him a coffee, which was laced with midazolam. Then he leaned Tom's car seat back, tilted Tom's head up so he couldn't breathe, and waited for the sleep apnea to work in connection with the midazolam. Once Tom was dead, Gil left Tom's car, got back in his own, and drove off. But this new theory still wasn't enough to make an arrest, and things were even more complicated for the detectives because the pathologist didn't actually conclude that Tom was killed specifically by midazolam. The pathologist suggested several other possible causes of death, including a heart arrhythmia, strangulation, and complications due to sleep apnea. Another issue for detectives was that

they had not been able to prove the car seen in the surveillance footage was the same SUV driven by Gil. If you recall from part one at the start of the investigation, detectives learned that just before 4.37 a.m. on the morning of Tom's death, a motion-activated camera at Kohl's, which is next door to Planet Fitness, captured an unidentifiable vehicle pulling into the gym's parking lot near where Tom's car was later found. The footage was very blurry, but detectives were able to see the vehicle's lights, and they could tell that the fog lights were on and that they had an unusual pattern. One light struck the ground much closer than the other. Fifteen minutes later, Tom's car pulled in next to the unidentifiable

vehicle. The cars remained parked side by side, but because of how blurry the footage was, detectives couldn't tell if any doors were opening or closing. 28 minutes later, the unidentifiable car pulled away while Tom's car stayed put, never moving again. This just really strengthens my theory that the midazolam was given to Tom in that car. Plenty of time. Plenty of time. And if the strongest effects take place within 20 to 30 minutes, then whoever gave him the coffee with the midazolam in it would have seen that it had done its job.

It had done what he wanted it to do. They also could, just to add, just to really speed up the process, not to speculate too much here, but once Tom's starting to go out of it, you put your hand over their nose and their mouth. To speed things up. And that's it.

It's over in a couple seconds. And why would these two cars be parked next to each other for almost 30 minutes in an otherwise empty parking lot without anybody ever getting out or making communication with the other person? There's no doubt that whoever shows we don't know who the person is in that car. That's the question mark for me. There's no doubt that whoever is in that other car, they killed him. I mean, I don't think I don't think that's even a question at this point. That's your murderer.

Now, were they connected to someone else? Is this are there multiple people involved? We don't think that's even a question at this point. That's your murderer. Now, were they connected to someone else? Are there multiple people involved? We don't know yet. But without a doubt, the person that's in that vehicle is at least partially responsible for Tom's death. We just got to figure out who that person is. Yes, exactly. But remember, they had an idea who the SUV belonged to because Gil had shown up to the scene driving a white SUV, a Nissan Pathfinder could be seen heading in the direction of Planet Fitness, passing a series of businesses along Albany Avenue. And the vehicle's fog lights were

on, and they had an unusual pattern, just like the pal car seen next to Tom's car. One light struck the ground much closer than the other. But unfortunately, because of how blurry the footage at Kohl's was, detectives weren't able to know for certain that the same Pathfinder seen on Albany Avenue was the same car that pulled into the gym parking lot. However, they could tell that a minute and a half after the SUV pulled out of the gym parking lot, a white Nissan Pathfinder with a defective fog light was back on Albany Avenue. So it seemed like they were looking at the same SUV in all of the footage. And I agree. It's 430 in the morning. There's not a

ton of people driving around. I 100% think that it was that white Nissan Pathfinder. And we know that Gil drives a Nissan Pathfinder that is white. Yeah. You talked about this in part one, where it's highly likely that it is the same Nissan Pathfinder. The question now is, does Gil's Pathfinder have the same identifiable marks, mainly being the fog lights being at different heights? Yes. We're going to talk about that. Obviously, that's the next step for the police, right? We have the same car. We can kind of follow it. But now does this vehicle, the one thing we have is one light being higher than the other. Is that the same for Gil's vehicle? Yeah. So we got to see if Gil's vehicle has that defective fog light.

And please let me ask you why the police didn't do that one of the first things. I mean, you're asking me questions that I'm asking myself. Yeah. I mean, they got him in the interrogation room. They're like, we know it's your car. It's the same car. But at that point, just days after the murder or the death, they haven't checked to see this yet. They're waiting this long to do that. Let me let me even throw a better scenario at you. Hey, Gil, listen, we were trying to find out what happened to Tom. By the way, we don't think you're involved at all. But could you do us a favor? We're having a bunch of people pull into the Planet Fitness at night with their vehicles

for just a couple seconds. We're just canceling everybody out. And you know what? You're going to be canceled out in like two seconds. Would you mind parking your Nissan Pathfinder back there for a minute? Just so we can take a quick screen grab so we can, you know, dot our I's, cross our T's. They do that. They replicate that same exact footage with his actual vehicle and see if it matches. Yeah. And just tell him we're trying to eliminate people. We're trying to eliminate

people. Hey, listen, we're on your side. You're definitely not involved, but would you mind parking your Pathfinder back there for two seconds? Now, yes, the footage is grainy, but now you'll have grainy footage of the suspect vehicle and grainy footage of Gil's vehicle and allow people to see those two images and see if they match. and they soon learned that Gill traded in the vehicle to a Land Rover dealership in Connecticut shortly after Tom died and in March 2012 the vehicle was sold to a man at auction. Detectives tracked the Nissan down and noticed the front of the driver's side fog lamp assembly was recessed back more than the passenger side. Detectives took the bumper and fog light assembly apart and discovered that the fog light wasn't clipped into place properly. So it sat back about one inch farther than the passenger

side fog light. This meant the fog light would strike the ground in a different way than the other one, just like the car seen on surveillance. And I mean, this is damning. This is damning, I think. It is. It just I just still don't see see enough for a jury to say, oh yeah, he definitely killed him. He could have been at the parking lot. Something might've went down while they were there. But now you also have to prove that it was Gil inside his vehicle. There's so many holes in this story where a defense attorney would have a field day

with this. While detectives now firmly believe that Gil's Nissan was the one seen in the surveillance footage. So they hired Forensic Video Solutions, or FVS, to analyze the surveillance video and Gil's Nissan using techniques known as reverse projection and headlight spread analysis. And I know this is your jam. You love this stuff. Love it. Yeah, you love it. And I think we've talked about FVS in previous cases. Didn't they take a look at the surveillance video of the fence surveillance video in that one case? I don't remember if it was FVS. I mean, there's a lot of different companies that do it. I know

Ellington Forensics does something like this as well. They did it on an episode of Breaking Homicide as far as tire impression recognition. So I don't know if it's the same company, but this is something that has been done by experts in and used in court to try and convict someone. Well, in the end, FVS concluded that the SUV in the surveillance video was indistinguishable from Gil's Nissan. Once detectives had the answers from the pathologist and from FVS, they finally felt like they had enough to charge Gil with murder. I don't agree. No, me neither. Unfortunately, no. They thought they had the smoking gun, so they went to Linda. They laid out their case for her, and finally, she began to believe that Gil, the man she once loved, did kill her husband, Tom.

She later told Dateline, quote, he is a master manipulator. He lives to manipulate. I was glad to see him exposed for being what he truly was, a sociopath, end quote. Damn. Right. Well, now we know why they're not together anymore. Well, they weren't together after Tom passed away and he moved on. It was because Linda gave him the boot.

I don't know. It seemed like she needed some convincing, man. Well, she got it. On October 16th, 2015, 48-year-old Gil Nunez was charged with second-degree murder and two counts of possession of a forged instrument for the fake CIA letterhead and identification. He still faced charges for the insurance fraud and pistol application stuff, but those would be handled in separate trials. At Gil's arraignment for the murder and fake CIA charges, many family members of Gil and Tom were there, along with some of

Gil's dental patients. Some of Gil's supporters even cheered and clapped as Gil entered the courtroom. He smiled and nodded at them. Gil then pleaded not guilty and hired top private criminal defense attorneys. A month later, Gil was released on a $1 million bond and he continued working in his dental practice as if he wasn't accused of killing his best friend. To hear that people were clapping and cheering and he was like smiling and nodding as if he's Brad Pitt on the red carpet. It's just cringy. It's cringy. No, it's weird. It's weird. But I think this is a situation as we go. One more part on this one, I'm assuming. Yeah, one more part.

As we go into the third part of this, I leave this episode feeling like Gil is responsible, but also feeling like Gil is not going to be found guilty. I just don't think there's enough here. I think there were mistakes made by law enforcement and there's a lot of speculation. There's a lot of connecting of the dots. And in some cases that's okay. Cause you know, one plus one equals two. But in this situation, I just think there's too many voids where a defense attorney can give an alternate theory that also fits a lot of the puzzle pieces that they currently have. And that's a problem because what does that equate to? Reasonable doubt. Not only that, do they have a lot of holes,

but police didn't really handle this investigation in the best way. So not only do you have big pieces of the puzzle missing that you can't fill in, but you've now given the defense a bunch of reasons that you're not legitimate. You didn't do your job. You didn't read him his Miranda rights. You didn't search Linda's house for this drug, this specific drug. Stomach contents are being thrown out. So you can't even prove that he ingested the drug through the coffee. All you have is theories and, yes, circumstantial evidence to support those theories,

but nothing besides that surveillance showing the SUV and Gil's SUV happened to have that same fog light defect. That's very strong. But you can't make a case for murder with just that because somebody could have taken Gil's car. You just don't know. And he would have no idea. And he could say he had no idea. He was asleep at 430 in the morning. He didn't know that somebody got in his car and took it. Well, another thing that I that I wonder about is GPS coordinates. This is 2011. So you have a situation where we talk about the Idaho murders, right? It wasn't only the vehicle. It was also Koberger's cell phone GPS location as far as the vehicle being a certain location and the cell phone bouncing off similar towers. So why wouldn't something

like that be done here where if Gil were to say, oh, I was in bed sleeping, you could probably see his phone pinging off different cell phone towers in the area of where he would have been if he was in that vehicle. You know Gil left his phone at home. Yeah. I mean, that's also possible. His phone could have been left at home. But there's other things that could be done to basically rule out the idea that it was another person. I don't know if those things were done or not, and we're just not talking about them yet. But overall, I completely agree with you. There's a lot of mishaps that happened here.

And if I'm the defense attorney for Gil, I'm going in there and I'm saying, listen, this isn't a case of law enforcement following the evidence and it led to Gil Nunez. This is a situation where the minute this came to be, they automatically came to the conclusion that Gil Nunez was responsible for it, and they found the evidence to support that. And I think we both can agree. We think Gil probably had something to do with this, but the fact that the police tunnel visioned on him so hard is not going to go in their benefit. I don't think so. I hope I'm wrong. If he's responsible for it, I'm hoping he was held accountable. But unless there's something

that you're holding back from us that we're unaware of at this point, I feel like this is going to be an uphill battle for the prosecutors because they're going to have a lot of things to overcome based on the handling of this case by investigators. So I'm ready for part three. Any final words from you before we let this one go? No, not at all. Just don't forget to order your criminal coffee with reduced shipping. Those are my final words. I'm sticking to them. Absolutely. And I've already started getting some recommendations for cases. Keep them coming. As far as criminal coffee is concerned, you can send cases that have DNA associated with them to contact at criminalcoffeeco.com. As always, guys, we appreciate you being with us. Everyone stay safe out there and we will see you nextco.com. As always, guys, we appreciate you being with us.

Everyone stay safe out there and we will see you next week. Bye.